- Forum >
- Topic: Latin >
- "Minime! Marcus domi dormit."
86 Comments
It was used to mean something like "not at all." Not quite the same as English "no" (which Classical Latin didn't really have.)
Should we report it if "Not at all!" is not accepted for these sorts of sentences?
Classical and Ecclesiastical are just different pronunciation styles. They're akin to a different accent within a dialect.
As far as Latin ways to say yes and no, Latin relied on restating the context with an affirming or negating word.
Estne Rōma in Graeciā? - Is Rome in Greece?
Rōma in Graeciā nōn est! - Rome is not in Greece!
In that context, could you instead answer with just "Nōn est!" or "Est!" for short? Languages tend to favor the evolution of short forms, so I imagine the Romans, too, would have come up with a way to affirm or negate something more briefly. Especially because that's such a common thing to need to do in everyday communication.
1010
In Spanish there is a categorical informal negation: Nones. I had just thought that it came from Latin Non est, but the dictionnary of the Spanish language academy just reads that it is the plural of non, an ancient form of no, from Latin non.
I didn't meet "Est!" alone.
@Vincent The more common, it seems, is to use "Non ita", and "Non ita est".
They are fixed and common expressions.
I do agree, except that Classical Latin stopped at the end of the Classical period, and Ecclesiastical Latin goes on creating new words, and using Vulgar Latin.
So, there are 2 definitions for "Classical" if you don't tell if you consider the period or the reconstructed pronunciation.
There is a classical Latin meaning that you consider the language used in the classical period, and it can use either classical pronunciation or ecclesiastical pronunciation.
And there's an ecclesiastical Latin that can be different in the vocabulary sometimes, or the spelling (using "j" for instance), and it's often pronounced with the ecclesiastical pronunciation.
Classical Latin: The classical golden age (1rst c. BC. to 1rst c. AC, sometimes 2nd c. AC)
From what I can gather reading on wiktionary, "no" in English was derived from Proto-Germanic words ("nai" - never, or "ne" - not), while "no/não/non", etc. in Romance languages came from "non" in Latin whose meaning was closer to "not".
As explained in the other comments in this thread, the word "minime" did not evolve into the word "no". "Minime" comes from "minimus", which evolved into "minimum".
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/minime#Etymology
The English "no/non/none" comes more directly from Proto-Germanic and the negatives of the Romance languages come from the Latin "non", although they all trace back to Proto-Indo-European.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/no#Etymology_1
Different languages are different. They say things differently. Don't look for one-to-one correspondence in usage.
I deleted my previous comments to avoid confusion for future readers, not knowing it would delete the thread, but yes, I see what I mean now. "at home" as a complement" and "sleeping" as a participial phrase.
As a rule in this course: they always accept the simple present and the progressive form, each time you have a present in Latin.
"Minime" means "Not at all." However the hover says "No". There are no generic "Yes/No" words in Latin.
The macron, the flat line over a vowel, indicates that that letter is long. It is not an accent. The speakers are doing fairly well in distinguishing between long and short vowels, and we should learn to remember how the words sound, rather than what they look like with macra
- 977
If you're going to be pedantic, then you shouldn't be saying that macra make letters long; they make sounds long. Anyway, the speakers are actually doing an atrocious job, and in my experience learning and teaching languages, I've seen learners benefit immensely from having a visual mnemonic to help them remember linguistic information.
I now agree that the speakers are doing an atrocious job. I’m sorry you find the distinction between macra and accents pedantic, but I do accept your non-pedantic distinction between letters and sounds; on a good day I would have caught my loose language. Thank you for the correction.
About accentmarks etc: As a new beginner I am very glad I do not have to place any accentmarks yet. At least not to be market correct. It is enough just to be used to new words. Actually: I wish other courses also didn't have them, at least for level one. On the other side: Good audio recordings should become the best attribute for Duo Lingo! Eyes for the written, Ears for audio (at least for new beginners).
Macrons aren't accents, and they're not as required as accents are in other languages.
So could this mean something like "I demand that Marcus sleep at home" or is there a different grammatical mood that you would use in Latin for that?
There are various ways Latin could express that, such as an imperative (direct command: Marcus, sleep at home! Marce, domi dormi!), or a subjunctive (a literal translation of your example: Postulo ut Marcus domi dormiat).
Thank you for answering! So could I leave out "Postulo ut" and just write "Marcus domi dormiat" or would that be wrong?
It's grammatically correct but would weaken the command/demand tone of your original sentence to more of an assertive "Marcus should/may/might sleep at home" or "let Marcus sleep at home."
The next time that happens, you need to hit the little flag icon before you move on to the next question and report a problem with the audio.
I wonder whether Latin has a deeper meaning to words like other classical languages? Like the word for house here 'domi'. In Classical Arabic there are different words for 'house', all carry a different meaning. 'Bayt' means the place where you sleep. 'Manzil' means 'the lower place, i.e. the place where you feet always get towards to easily. 'Maskan' means the place you relax and be at ease. 'Dar' means the place you stay close to and always return to. Does 'Domi' in Latin have a deeper meaning? Is it related to the word for sleeping (like 'the place where you sleep')?
- 977
As a native speaker, I can tell you none of that is true about Arabic. How exactly would those meanings even evolve? Who puts their feet in a different building than the one they sleep? How would people have conversations where they kept those meanings separate, so that their children could learn those meanings and continue using them in their own language?
No, "nuzuul" is not just descending in Arabic, it can also mean to end/pause a journey somewhere, like French "descendre." It has nothing to do with feet. sakiina can indeed mean "serenity," but sakan means "to reside/residence," and that's the meaning that "maskan" derives from. Both "sakiina" and "sakan" are derived from a root that means "to stand still," so there's no poetic connection here or anything. And "dar" is derived from the root d-y-r and is therefore not related to d-w-r, if that's what you meant by "return." "Manzil" means "home," and "maskan" means "lodging," so if anything, you're more likely to use "maskan" to talk about a temporary shelter you adopt away from home, so it hardly means "the place you relax or be at ease." Now somebody could think up some poetic connection between the words for their own prose/poetry if they want to, just like in any other language, but that doesn't actually change the meaning or etymology of the words. Don't believe everything you read in internet memes.
I know very well that in modern, conversational Arabic these words have lost their meaning, and nobody speaks classical Arabic with their children.
I don't think the OP's logic is sound. It is more likely OP is mixing up etymology and older meanings (or meaning of a previous word) all together as if they were all concurrent. The vague idea of "words having a deeper meaning" occurs in "classical" languages as much as in modern languages. For example, look "home" at any decent dictionary. You're going to find a bunch of "deeper" meanings beyond the first one that comes to your mind, and that professionally compiled list might still not be complete.
No, the two come from different roots: PIE dṓm (“house, home”), from root dem- (“to build”) and PIE *drem- (“run, sleep”).
domus “house” (domi “at home”) comes from an Indo-European root word to do with building. In English we have the word “timber” from the same root.
You are very good in etymology, I wouldn't think of "timber", it seems very different.
It's the translation of the Minime! part of the Latin. As for why there is a negation at all, well, I suppose we should just assume it makes sense in whatever context this would be said. Perhaps someone just asked whether he would sleep somewhere else.
- 977
Well, what about the other way around though? If the prompt is in English, it doesn't make sense to expect us to always translate "no" to "minime" when they don't necessarily correspond.
The lack of context really ruins this one. If you're reading "No! Marcus sleeps at home." It could meaning something like "No (as a response to a suggestion or idea or even order)! Marcus sleeps (as in "will sleep") at home (as in not anywhere else, as in "I refuse the idea that Marcus should/would/could/must sleep anywhere else but home)" or a mere answer to someone asking if marcus is sleeping in some place that isn't home, such as "Oh no (, not there where you said)! He sleeps (or will be sleeping) at home." The problem is, just as it is there is nothing to teach you if the Latin version accepts as many contexts or not, so you're still left wondering.
Latin declines all nouns.
All names are nouns.
Therefore Latin declines all names.
"Marcus" is 2nd declension masculine. "Marcus" is the nominative (subject), "Marce" is the vocative (direct address).
Here is a plain-English overview of what the cases are and how they work:
Latin cases, in English
Here are the noun and adjective declension charts:
declensions 1-3
declensions 4&5
Adjectives must agree in gender, number, and case with the nouns they modify, but they have their own declensions. Sometimes you get lucky and the adjective just happens to follow the same declension as the noun, but that is not a guarantee.
For good measure, here are the verb conjugation charts:
1st Conjugation
2nd Conjugation
3rd Conjugation
3rd i-stem Conjugation
4th Conjugation
- 350
Have we not been shown that Marce is the way Marcus would appear in Latin? When I tried to use it, wring answer! Grr.
Latin declines all nouns.
All names are nouns.
Therefore, Latin declines all names.
"Marce" is the vocative, used when you're addressing Marcus directly.
"Marcus" is the nominative, used when he is the subject or subject complement.
Here is a plain-English overview of what the cases are and how they work:
Latin cases, in English
Here are the noun and adjective declension charts:
declensions 1-3
declensions 4&5
Adjectives must agree in gender, number, and case with the nouns they modify, but they have their own declensions. Sometimes you get lucky and the adjective just happens to follow the same declension as the noun, but that is not a guarantee.
For good measure, here are the verb conjugation charts:
1st Conjugation
2nd Conjugation
3rd Conjugation
3rd i-stem Conjugation
4th Conjugation
Why do they say Marcus and then sometimes Marce? When i was asked to translate a sentence with marcus latin and i wrote marcus they marked it wrong and wrote that i was meant to put Marce and now they are putting marcus
- 1010
-Vidisne? (Do you see it?)
-
Non video. (No / No, I don't)
-
Video / Ita / Sane... (Yes / Yes, I do)
("Can anyone explain", bare infinitive. The tense is carried by "can".)
That's just not the preposition we use in English. It's "sleeps at home".
The voice acting in this one is quite pleasant. I just wanted to give praise where it's due.
Is anyone else having an issue with certain characters, like the bear in this one, sticking down into the area in which you are supposed to type? It's annoying.
Please file a bug report:
https://support.duolingo.com/hc/en-us/articles/204728264-How-do-I-report-a-bug-
- 2090
No, it's present tense "sleeps." The perfect/past tense version would be "dormivit."
